Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Checking relevance for Thiru K. Palaniswamy VS M. Shanmugam...
Checking relevance for UNION OF INDIA VS RAJ GROW IMPEX LLP...
UNION OF INDIA VS RAJ GROW IMPEX LLP - 2021 4 Supreme 606 : In matters of grant of interim relief, satisfaction of the Court only about existence of prima facie case in favour of the suitor is not enough. Other elements—balance of convenience and likelihood of irreparable injury—are not of empty formality and carry their own relevance. While exercising discretion in granting interim relief, the Court must weigh the risk of injustice if the final decision runs counter to the course adopted at the time of granting or refusing the interim relief. The conduct of the party in the lower court, particularly in relation to the bona fide nature of their claim and whether they acted in good faith, is a relevant factor in this assessment. The Court emphasized that absence of bona fide in a claimant renders their claim of equity incompatible, and no leniency can be granted in such cases. Therefore, the conduct of a party in lower proceedings, especially if it reveals lack of bona fide or improper conduct, must be considered when granting stay in their favour.Checking relevance for Indiabulls Asset Reconstruction Company Limited VS Ram Kishore Arora...
Checking relevance for Hindustan Petroleum Corporation LTD. VS Sriman Narayan...
Hindustan Petroleum Corporation LTD. VS Sriman Narayan - 2002 4 Supreme 546 : The High Court''''s order granting interim injunction was found unsustainable because it failed to consider the reasons given by the Trial Court in its order declining to accept the respondent''''s prayer for interim injunction. The Supreme Court emphasized that the High Court did not examine the considerations which weighed and the reasons which persuaded the Trial Court in rejecting the prayer for interim mandatory injunction, indicating that the conduct and reasoning of the lower court must be taken into account when deciding whether to grant a stay in favor of a party.Checking relevance for Dalpat Kumar VS Prahlad Singh...
Dalpat Kumar VS Prahlad Singh - 1991 0 Supreme(SC) 726 : The conduct of the party in the lower court is a relevant factor to be considered when granting a stay or temporary injunction. In this case, the court explicitly noted that the respondent''''s conduct militated against bona fides, and that repeated refusals of injunction by both the Civil Court and the High Court in prior proceedings were material circumstances that weighed against granting relief. The court emphasized that the party seeking injunction must not only establish a prima facie case and irreparable injury but also that the balance of convenience must favor the grant, which includes evaluating the conduct of the party in the lower courts. The court held that the respondent could be adequately compensated by damages if successful, and that the history of litigation and conduct undermined the claim for equitable relief.Checking relevance for AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISE LIMITED VS KS INFRASPACE LLP LIMITED...
AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISE LIMITED VS KS INFRASPACE LLP LIMITED - 2020 1 Supreme 57 : The conduct of the plaintiff will also be a very relevant consideration for purposes of injunction. In a matter concerning grant of injunction, apart from existence of a prima facie case, balance of convenience, irreparable injury, conduct of party seeking equitable relief of injunction is also very essential to be considered. Defendants had also proceeded to utilize sum of Rs.36.20 crores and had materially altered their position evidently by inaction of plaintiff to institute suit in time and having allowed third party rights to accrue by making substantial investments. Balance of convenience is in favour of defendants on account of intervening developments.Checking relevance for Harish Ambalal Choksi VS Narendra Ambalal Choksi...
Harish Ambalal Choksi VS Narendra Ambalal Choksi - 2022 0 Supreme(Guj) 1534 : In the case of Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprise Limited (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held and observed in paragraph no.15 as under: ''''The conduct of the plaintiff will also be a very relevant consideration for purposes of injunction. The discretion at this stage has to be exercised judiciously and not arbitrarily.'''' This establishes that the conduct of a party in the lower court is a relevant factor to be considered when granting a stay or interim injunction in their favour.
